Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

U.S. Department of Education Outlines Loan Relief Pathway for Certain Students
June 30, 2016

On March 11, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) released an advanced proposal of rulemaking that would establish a more "borrower-friendly process" for students seeking loan relief triggered by unscrupulous conduct by higher education institutions. Not two weeks later, the DOE issued another press release detailing how students who were defrauded at 91 former Corinthian Colleges, Inc. campuses nationwide "have a clear path to loan forgiveness under evidence uncovered by the Department." Significantly, this DOE rule applies to colleges and not the financial institutions providing student loans to the educational institutions.

In response to the failure of several for-profit higher education institutions like Corinthian, the DOE began a rulemaking process to clarify how direct loan borrowers who believe they have been defrauded by their institutions can seek relief. Importantly, the DOE rule strengthens provisions to hold colleges accountable for alleged wrongdoing outside of arbitration proceedings.

In addition to addressing arbitration, the language of the proposed rule would:

  • Allow students to pursue a discharge of their student loan balances without the constraints of a statute of limitation;
  • Establish a simpler, more uniform standard for relief that incorporates crucial elements of state consumer protection laws;
  • Create borrower-friendly processes for determining whether discharges are merited, including pathways for group relief without individual applications from borrowers;
  • Hold schools accountable and ensure they have skin in the game when discharges result from their unlawful actions;
  • Ensure schools disclose information to prospective students when various risk indicators are triggered, like too many former students struggling to repay their loans; and
  • Provide more information more often to affected borrowers on their closed school discharge rights, and grant discharge without an application in certain circumstances.

The DOE proposal is independent of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rule proposed May 5, which prohibits the use of arbitration agreements to block class actions involving consumer financial products and services (including student loans). That rule would cover most consumer loans once finalized. The DOE release clarifies prior DOE regulations for so-called "defense to repayment" or "borrower defense" allowing borrowers to seek discharge of federal loans if their college’s acts give rise to a state law cause of action. In the future, post-secondary institutions arranging financing for student loans must comply with both DOE and CFPB rules.
Related Practices
Consumer Finance Consumer Finance
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.